6 ms·

>his main motto is 'close the borders' I'm not out of touch enough to have missed this opinion. But that is not the same as saying that people should be sent b

>his main motto is 'close the borders' I'm not out of touch enough to have missed this opinion. But that is not the same as saying that people should be sent back to war zones. We don't have borders with Syria. But you are right that I don't know specifically what that Dutch politician actually demands other than closing the borders.

jacquesm 11y ago
If it were up to Geert Wilders we'd be going around with a color chart in shades of brown and a burning Koran to figure out who we should kick out and who is allowed to stay.
- alvarosm 11y ago
  And if it were up to you you'd turn your country into a third world shithole. Just a similarly bigoted fact.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  Well if you ditch the color chart and add a burning New Testament and Chumash, I don't see the problem.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    OT3? In that bastion of critical thought called 'the Onion' they had a pretty good summary of such a solution: http://www.theonion.com/article/northern-irish-serbs-hutus-granted-homeland-in-wes-305 http://www.theonion.com/article/northern-irish-serbs-hutus-g...
toyg 11y ago
> that is not the same as saying that people should be sent back to war zones. "In the region", you can choose whether to send them to: 1) Turkey, an increasingly-authoritarian regime which is already overflowing with millions of refugees, making money with the fanatics and holding mainstream cultural values that tend to despise people from Syria/Kurdistan/Iraq; 2) Lebanon, a country where refugees from other conflicts already account for over a third of the total population, and which is far from stable on its own (half-run by the unofficial Hezbollah militia) 3) Israel. They don't even want "their own" arabs... 4) Iraq, another war-torn country half-owned by the same petro-fanatics; 5) Iran, which is logistically very difficult (being on the other side of warzone Iraq) and, well, not great for people running from religious fanatics; 6) Jordan, another poor and unstable country already full of refugees from previous conflicts. 7) Saudi Arabia. They're the ones funding the fanatics. Enough said. 8) Egypt. Yet another dictator, vaguely more stable, as ruthless as Assad. They also have permanent Palestinian camps which have been there for decades and clearly don't want any more. 9) Palestine/Gaza or Palestine / West Bank. Let's not even go there. Ok, let's go further then: Libya? Sorry, other war. Tunisia? Another wobbly government, and so close to Europe to make it look silly. Georgia/Armenia/Azerbaijan? Dictators, guerrillas... Yemen? Other war. Oman? Same guy has been in charge for 45 years. We can go on, but tbh, it's all like that. Countries in the region are either f*ed up, autocratic regimes, or are actively sponsoring the lunatics. Decent people have nowhere to go.
- fauigerzigerk 11y ago
  All true, but none of that contradicts what I said. Right now, most refugees are in Turkey, Lebanon, Germany and Jordan (not counting the internally displaced). Lebanon and Jordan in particular are completely overwhelmed. What many people (such as the UK government) suggest is to help these countries cope by sending money and logistic support. Many refugees understandably do not wish to spend the coming years in bleak refugee camps and want to leave the region. That is very understandable and in my opinion the world should agree on refugee quotas according to population size and economic strength. The world includes the United States of America that otherwise likes to make its presence felt in the Middle East.
- gotchange 11y ago
  We should then pressure the Gulf countries to chip in and take in some of those refugees esp. those who hold more conservative and traditionalist views because they'd feel more at home there and not have to experience culture shocks while in Europe since some of them are coming even from rural and undeveloped areas of Syria or Iraq. Also, I'd like to point out that there's no Palestinian camps in Egypt that I know of but good on you seeing through all the BS that Sisi is just another ruthless and bloodthirsty dictator who is by the way a closeted Islamist who holds equally despicable fundamentalist views but he's good enough so far in hiding them under the veneer of reformist moderate leadership.
- fineman 11y ago
  The right answer? Kill Assad and help the people take back Syria. We should have done it three years ago before much of the moderate resistance was killed but it still needs doing. And as for your Israel jab, they're better to the Palestinians than the Arab states in the area are. And none of the Israelis I've talked to seem to have inherently racist beliefs but many of the recently middle-eastern Arabs do. (About the Palestinians.)
  - Ygg2 11y ago
    Right? Just like killing Saddam and Gadafi stabilized the region. I'm sure nothing bad would happen. It's not like something worse than Al Quaida can happen again. Europe fully deserves the migrant crisis. It went into Middle East guns blazing, and expects to come out of it unscathed.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
It's not just NL. It's PL too, and DE and apparently almost every other European country. If the whole Europe closes up the borders at the same time, it's effectively sending the refugees back to warzone.

jacquesm 11y ago

If it were up to Geert Wilders we'd be going around with a color chart in shades of brown and a burning Koran to figure out who we should kick out and who is allowed to stay.

alvarosm 11y ago
And if it were up to you you'd turn your country into a third world shithole. Just a similarly bigoted fact.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
eli_gottlieb 11y ago
Well if you ditch the color chart and add a burning New Testament and Chumash, I don't see the problem.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  OT3? In that bastion of critical thought called 'the Onion' they had a pretty good summary of such a solution: http://www.theonion.com/article/northern-irish-serbs-hutus-granted-homeland-in-wes-305 http://www.theonion.com/article/northern-irish-serbs-hutus-g...

toyg 11y ago

> that is not the same as saying that people should be sent back to war zones. "In the region", you can choose whether to send them to: 1) Turkey, an increasingly-authoritarian regime which is already overflowing with millions of refugees, making money with the fanatics and holding mainstream cultural values that tend to despise people from Syria/Kurdistan/Iraq; 2) Lebanon, a country where refugees from other conflicts already account for over a third of the total population, and which is far from stable on its own (half-run by the unofficial Hezbollah militia) 3) Israel. They don't even want "their own" arabs... 4) Iraq, another war-torn country half-owned by the same petro-fanatics; 5) Iran, which is logistically very difficult (being on the other side of warzone Iraq) and, well, not great for people running from religious fanatics; 6) Jordan, another poor and unstable country already full of refugees from previous conflicts. 7) Saudi Arabia. They're the ones funding the fanatics. Enough said. 8) Egypt. Yet another dictator, vaguely more stable, as ruthless as Assad. They also have permanent Palestinian camps which have been there for decades and clearly don't want any more. 9) Palestine/Gaza or Palestine / West Bank. Let's not even go there. Ok, let's go further then: Libya? Sorry, other war. Tunisia? Another wobbly government, and so close to Europe to make it look silly. Georgia/Armenia/Azerbaijan? Dictators, guerrillas... Yemen? Other war. Oman? Same guy has been in charge for 45 years. We can go on, but tbh, it's all like that. Countries in the region are either f*ed up, autocratic regimes, or are actively sponsoring the lunatics. Decent people have nowhere to go.

fauigerzigerk 11y ago
All true, but none of that contradicts what I said. Right now, most refugees are in Turkey, Lebanon, Germany and Jordan (not counting the internally displaced). Lebanon and Jordan in particular are completely overwhelmed. What many people (such as the UK government) suggest is to help these countries cope by sending money and logistic support. Many refugees understandably do not wish to spend the coming years in bleak refugee camps and want to leave the region. That is very understandable and in my opinion the world should agree on refugee quotas according to population size and economic strength. The world includes the United States of America that otherwise likes to make its presence felt in the Middle East.
gotchange 11y ago
We should then pressure the Gulf countries to chip in and take in some of those refugees esp. those who hold more conservative and traditionalist views because they'd feel more at home there and not have to experience culture shocks while in Europe since some of them are coming even from rural and undeveloped areas of Syria or Iraq. Also, I'd like to point out that there's no Palestinian camps in Egypt that I know of but good on you seeing through all the BS that Sisi is just another ruthless and bloodthirsty dictator who is by the way a closeted Islamist who holds equally despicable fundamentalist views but he's good enough so far in hiding them under the veneer of reformist moderate leadership.
fineman 11y ago
The right answer? Kill Assad and help the people take back Syria. We should have done it three years ago before much of the moderate resistance was killed but it still needs doing. And as for your Israel jab, they're better to the Palestinians than the Arab states in the area are. And none of the Israelis I've talked to seem to have inherently racist beliefs but many of the recently middle-eastern Arabs do. (About the Palestinians.)
- Ygg2 11y ago
  Right? Just like killing Saddam and Gadafi stabilized the region. I'm sure nothing bad would happen. It's not like something worse than Al Quaida can happen again. Europe fully deserves the migrant crisis. It went into Middle East guns blazing, and expects to come out of it unscathed.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

It's not just NL. It's PL too, and DE and apparently almost every other European country. If the whole Europe closes up the borders at the same time, it's effectively sending the refugees back to warzone.